A July 18 decision by the Utah Supreme Court granting public access to all the state’s streams seems likely to spur revived interest in the way Colorado stream access is conducted.

In a unanimous decision, the Utah high court affirmed state ownership of moving water while holding that without the right to touch the stream bottom, the public cannot effectively enjoy the right to recreate on these waters. The ruling applies to all surface water where legal access can be gained.

The decision prompted a celebration among anglers and doubtlessly spurred a determination by landowners to overturn it. Most observers expect property rights advocates to advance legislation that either will limit or revoke this easement granted by the court.

Meanwhile, Utah recreationists are casting or splashing where they please under a court guideline that requires them to act “responsibly” and “cause no unnecessary injury to the landowner”—whatever that means.

This development by a neighbor state casts a spotlight on Colorado’s own muddled access situation, a hodgepodge of legislation, court precedent and official interpretation. Or misinterpretation, as the case may be. For want of a definitive guideline, Colorado operates under a general presumption it shares with Wyoming and other Rocky Mountain states—that streams may be fished or floated so long as contact with the stream bed is incidental to navigation.

Some years back, access activists attempted to gain signatures for a ballot initiative, but fell short. That maneuver prompted formation of a property rights group to oppose it. Both camps since have ducked court confrontation, like two boxers bobbing and weaving, yet afraid to exchange blows.

Sentiment remains strong on both sides for what is a powerful economic and emotional issue. Whether this will boil over into legislative or legal action remains to be seen.